Publications

BibTex format

@article{Loeb:2022:10.7326/M22-1966,
author = {Loeb, M and Bartholomew, A and Hashmi, M and Tarhuni, W and Hassany, M and Youngster, I and Somayaji, R and Larios, O and Kim, J and Missaghi, B and Vayalumkal, JV and Mertz, D and Chagla, Z and Cividino, M and Ali, K and Mansour, S and Castellucci, LA and Frenette, C and Parkes, L and Downing, M and Muller, M and Glavin, V and Newton, J and Hookoom, R and Leis, JA and Kinross, J and Smith, S and Borhan, S and Singh, P and Pullenayegum, E and Conly, J},
doi = {10.7326/M22-1966},
journal = {Annals of Internal Medicine},
pages = {1629--1638},
title = {Medical masks versus N95 respirators for preventing COVID-19 among health care workers: a randomized trial},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/M22-1966},
volume = {175},
year = {2022}
}

Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - Background:It is uncertain if medical masks offer similar protection against COVID-19 compared with N95 respirators.Objective:To determine whether medical masks are noninferior to N95 respirators to prevent COVID-19 in health care workers providing routine care.Design:Multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04296643).Setting:29 health care facilities in Canada, Israel, Pakistan, and Egypt from 4 May 2020 to 29 March 2022.Participants:1009 health care workers who provided direct care to patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19.Intervention:Use of medical masks versus fit-tested N95 respirators for 10 weeks, plus universal masking, which was the policy implemented at each site.Measurements:The primary outcome was confirmed COVID-19 on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test.Results:In the intention-to-treat analysis, RT-PCR–confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 52 of 497 (10.46%) participants in the medical mask group versus 47 of 507 (9.27%) in the N95 respirator group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.69]). An unplanned subgroup analysis by country found that in the medical mask group versus the N95 respirator group RT-PCR–confirmed COVID-19 occurred in 8 of 131 (6.11%) versus 3 of 135 (2.22%) in Canada (HR, 2.83 [CI, 0.75 to 10.72]), 6 of 17 (35.29%) versus 4 of 17 (23.53%) in Israel (HR, 1.54 [CI, 0.43 to 5.49]), 3 of 92 (3.26%) versus 2 of 94 (2.13%) in Pakistan (HR, 1.50 [CI, 0.25 to 8.98]), and 35 of 257 (13.62%) versus 38 of 261 (14.56%) in Egypt (HR, 0.95 [CI, 0.60 to 1.50]). There were 47 (10.8%) adverse events related to the intervention reported in the medical mask group and 59 (13.6%) in the N95 respirator group.Limitation:Potential acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 through household and community exposure, heterogeneity between countries, uncertainty in the estimates of effect, differences in self-reported adherence, differences in baseline antibodies, and between-country differences in cir
AU  - Loeb,M
AU  - Bartholomew,A
AU  - Hashmi,M
AU  - Tarhuni,W
AU  - Hassany,M
AU  - Youngster,I
AU  - Somayaji,R
AU  - Larios,O
AU  - Kim,J
AU  - Missaghi,B
AU  - Vayalumkal,JV
AU  - Mertz,D
AU  - Chagla,Z
AU  - Cividino,M
AU  - Ali,K
AU  - Mansour,S
AU  - Castellucci,LA
AU  - Frenette,C
AU  - Parkes,L
AU  - Downing,M
AU  - Muller,M
AU  - Glavin,V
AU  - Newton,J
AU  - Hookoom,R
AU  - Leis,JA
AU  - Kinross,J
AU  - Smith,S
AU  - Borhan,S
AU  - Singh,P
AU  - Pullenayegum,E
AU  - Conly,J
DO  - 10.7326/M22-1966
EP  - 1638
PY  - 2022///
SN  - 0003-4819
SP  - 1629
TI  - Medical masks versus N95 respirators for preventing COVID-19 among health care workers: a randomized trial
T2  - Annals of Internal Medicine
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/M22-1966
UR  - https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000955829100001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=a2bf6146997ec60c407a63945d4e92bb
UR  - https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M22-1966
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/104375
VL  - 175
ER  -

Download

Dr James Kinross

Contact

Location

Summary

Citation

BibTex format

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)